CHAPTER 2 The GEM-Index Constructing a unitary measure of gender equality in the news Monika Djerf-Pierre & Maria Edström 2.1 The status of women in the news: A global issue The issue in focus in this book is the lack of gender equality in the news media, and in Chapter 1 we explained why it is important to explore the causes and consequences of this problem. A key question is how to measure progress in the news media. Composite indices are frequently used to monitor the status or progress of global developments. An index is a unitary measure that encapsulates key aspects of a phenomenon. Some of the most prominent exam- ples from the media world include the World Press Freedom Index published by Reporters Without Borders and the Media Freedom indicators published by Freedom House. Indices are also common when assessing the advancement of gender equality in general, such as the Global Gender Gap Index (GGI) by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Gender Inequality Index (GII) from United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The aim of this chapter is to develop such a unitary measure of gender equal- ity in news media content. Although gender and journalism has been on the agenda at least since the 1970s, we still lack a robust and easy-to-use measure to quantify, assess, and track the magnitude and persistence of gender inequalities in the news. By drawing from data collected by the Global Media Monitoring Project (GMMP), we devise the Gender Equality in the News Media Index (GEM-I) – a composite index that estimates the gender gap between women and men regarding their status in the news. An indicator is an instrument that provides information about the status and progress of a specific process or condition in society (UNESCO, 2012). Indicators have previously been constructed and used to assess the development of gender equality in the media, not the least in media organisations (Byerly, Djerf-Pierre, Monika, & Maria Edström. (2020). The GEM-Index: Constructing a unitary measure of gender equality in the news. In Monika Djerf-Pierre, & Maria Edström (Eds.), Comparing gender and media equality across the globe: A cross-national study of the qualities, causes, and consequences of gender equality in and through the news media (pp. 59–98). Gothenburg: Nordicom, University of Gothenburg. https://doi.org/10.48335/9789188855329-2 59 Monika Djerf-Pierre & Maria Edström 2013; Gallagher, 1981; Gender Links, 2015; IFJ, 2009; Padovani et al., 2017). However, the GMMP is to date the only available global data on gender and news content, and it constitutes the obvious data source to take as a point of departure for the present study. The GEM-I developed in this chapter builds on the data collected by the GMMP, and it is composed of six indicators available in the GMMP reports that consider the overall presence of women and men as news subjects and as reporters, as well as the representation in gender-sensitive roles and topics. In this chapter, the GEM-I is methodically tested to be broadly applicable to all forms of news media, easy to apply and rate, and statistically robust and reliable. We also show how the GEM-I can be used to gauge the development of gender equality in news content across time and countries. The empirical analysis presented in this chapter shows persistent gender inequalities in the news media across the globe and predicts that it will take over 70 years to reach full gender equality in news content across the globe at the current rate of change. The chapter first presents a research review providing the theoretical foun- dation for identifying and selecting indicators to be included in the GEM-I (§2.2). This is followed by a section presenting the five guiding principles and empirical evidence for the construction of the composite index (§2.3). Finally, we put the GEM-I to practical use by utilising the index in a concrete analysis of how gender equality in the news media has developed across time and between regions (§2.4). 2.2 Measuring gender representation and equality in the news An often-used contemporary slogan from those who call for better represen- tation in the media is: “You can’t be what you can’t see”.1 This summarises the growing understanding of the importance of media representations, as it reminds us that the presence of women and men in the media is indeed a matter of social recognition, status, and power. The normative arguments for gender equality in media representations are anchored in universal values of human rights and freedom of expression and opinion. Gender equality in news content is important because it offers “sym- bolic recognition”, “voice”, and “relevance” of and for women in the news (discussed at length in Chapter 1). Symbolic recognition originates from the opportunity to see, listen to, and read about women in a broad range of societal roles. This is essential to counter gender stereotypes that narrow the repertoire of life choices for both women and men. Voice entails women being heard and having a say in issues that affect them and others in society. Relevance emanates from a broadening of the range of news topics and perspectives in the news 60 The GEM-Index by including issues and views that resonate with and emanate from women’s lives and experiences. But how can representation be reliably assessed and quantified to reveal the scale and persistence of gender inequalities in the news? The mere presence of women in news stories is certainly not always a sign of gender equality, but linked to other features and conditions of news production. Tabloid and popularised news may stage women as tokens or attractions when they employ young and visibly attractive women to host television news shows. Women are often cast as victims in crime stories or as “ordinary people” in the news. To be sure, no one would argue that the dominance of half-naked women as “Page 3” girls in British tabloids is a sign of women’s status in the newspaper. There are certainly also news beats that are dominated by men, such as sports, without being accorded high status in the field of journalism – or in society. This means that plain “body counting” is not sufficient to reveal inequalities; the type of topics and roles in the news – and the social value attached to them in society and in journalism – must also be considered when evaluating gender equality in news content. The issue of women’s (in)visibility and lack of status in the media has been a prolific area of theorising and empirical research since the 1970s, when Gaye Tuchman (1978, 1979) published the seminal studies in feminist media criticism, accusing the media of conducting a “symbolic annihilation” of women by excluding them from news content. This chapter aligns with this strand of research in defining gender equality in the news media as a state where men and women are represented with equal status in the news. In defining gender equality as equality in status, we underscore the ubiqui- tous link between representation, social recognition, and power. Status is a multifaceted concept, referring both to the recognition of women as human agents equally worthy of respect (Couldry, 2010; Fraser, 2000)2 and to status as a primary organising mechanism of social fields, including politics and the media (Bourdieu, 1990, 1998, 2001; Djerf-Pierre, 2007; Melin, 2008).3 News reporting is gendered in various ways, but there are certainly topics and roles that are particularly “sensitive” to gender-based disparities (UNESCO, 2012), in particular those essential for the empowerment of women both in society (as citizens) and in the field of journalism (as professionals). An assessment of status in the news must thus consider the overall visibility and voice given to men and women, as well as their representation in status-sensitive roles and news topics. The most ambitious attempt to date to define and assemble a large set of gender-sensitive indicators comes from the pioneering studies from the GMMP, although they do not explicitly use the term. The first study, Global Media Monitoring: Women’s Participation in the News, analysed one day of radio, television, and newspapers in 71 countries in 1995 (GMMP, 1995). Since 1995, 61 Monika Djerf-Pierre & Maria Edström the GMMP has measured the pace of change in women’s and men’s media representation at five-year intervals. In 2015, 114 countries from all regions of the world participated in the data collection (Macharia, 2015) and at the time of writing this chapter, a new analysis is scheduled for 2020. The GMMP contains the only available data that allow for cross-country comparisons of gender equality in news media content with a global scope. The latest version from 2015 presents hundreds of measures of the presence of men and women in various media in stories about various news topics; as news subjects or sources (“people in the news”) and in different roles in the news stories; as news reporters and presenters; and women’s centrality in news stories, including the extent to which the story focused explicitly on women, gender issues or inequality, and if it challenged gender stereotypes. UNESCO (2012) has also published a set of “gender-sensitive indicators for media” to be used as a “non-prescriptive” tool for conducting independ- ent evaluations of gender equality in the media as well as an instrument for media organisation to use for evaluation and self-assessment. UNESCO’s set of indicators has, to our knowledge, not been put to practice in large scale empiri- cal studies.